Key result
H2FPEF score predicts reduced aerobic capacity in exertional dyspnea whereas HFA-PEFF fails.
Why the study?
This study sought to determine the performance of the H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores for predicting exercise capacity and echocardiographic measures of intracardiac pressures during exercise in HFpEF.
Do the H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores predict exercise intolerance and abnormal hemodynamics in patients with HFpEF?
Cross-Sectional (n=187)
No
Do the H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores predict exercise intolerance and abnormal hemodynamics in patients with HFpEF?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.71
p-value: p=0.0005
The H2FPEF score is superior to the HFA-PEFF score for predicting reduced aerobic capacity in patients with HFpEF, though both correlate with abnormal exercise hemodynamics.
H2FPEF may aid noninvasive stratification of aerobic capacity in dyspnea; leaves open comparative value versus HFA-PEFF for HFpEF hemodynamics.
Exercise intolerance is a primary manifestation of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and is associated with abnormal hemodynamics and poor quality of life. Two multiparametric scoring systems have been proposed to diagnose HFpEF. This study sought to determine the performance of the H 2 FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores for predicting exercise capacity and echocardiographic measures of intracardiac pressures during exercise. Patients with HFpEF (n = 83) and control subjects without HF (n = 104) underwent bicycle exercise echocardiography. In a subset, simultaneous expired gas analysis was performed to measure peak oxygen consumption (VO 2 ). The H 2 FPEF score was obtainable in all patients while the HFA-PEFF score could not be calculated in 23 patients (feasibility 88%). Both H 2 FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores were correlated with higher E/e’ ratio (r = 0.49 and r = 0.46), lower systolic tricuspid annular velocity (r=-0.44 and =-0.24), and lower cardiac output (r=-0.28 and r=-0.24) during peak exercise. Peak VO 2 and exercise duration decreased with increasing the H 2 FPEF score (r=-0.40 and r=-0.32), and the H 2 FPEF score predicted reduced aerobic capacity (AUC 0.71, p = 0.0005), but the HFA-PEFF score did not (p = 0.07). These data provide new insights into the role of the H 2 FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores for predicting exercise intolerance and abnormal hemodynamics in patients HFpEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amanai et al. (2021) conducted a cross-sectional in Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and exertional dyspnea (n=187). H2FPEF score vs. HFA-PEFF score was evaluated on Prediction of reduced aerobic capacity (peak VO2 < 14 mL/min/kg) (AUC 0.71, p=0.0005). The H2FPEF score significantly predicted reduced aerobic capacity (AUC 0.71, p=0.0005) in patients with exertional dyspnea, whereas the HFA-PEFF score did not (AUC 0.61, p=0.10).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: